Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8447089" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I was responding specifically to [USER=177]@Umbran[/USER] ’s example where depending on the way the PC was trying to convince the goblin boss they should retreat, Charisma (Intimidation) or Strength (Intimidation) might have been more appropriate. I was agreeing that knowing the player’s approach is important to determining what ability to call for it a check is necessary, but suggested that expecting the player to be clear with their action declaration up front would be more efficient than asking probing questions every time.I don’t think this is really applicable to what I was discussing with Umbran. We were talking about a case where what the character is trying to do is clear, but the way in which they go about it might affect which ability ought to be applied to the check (assuming one is necessary)If you’re asking follow-up questions after every action declaration to figure out what ability to call for a check with, I imagine it would make a big difference in efficiency. If you’re not doing that (which I take it you are not), I don’t imagine it would make much difference in efficiency. But I imagine it would run into the phenomenon Umbran was pointing out, where you always end up calling for Ability (Skill) checks with the same combinations of ability and skill, even when a different ability might have been more appropriate to what the player was trying to do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 8447089, member: 6779196"] I was responding specifically to [USER=177]@Umbran[/USER] ’s example where depending on the way the PC was trying to convince the goblin boss they should retreat, Charisma (Intimidation) or Strength (Intimidation) might have been more appropriate. I was agreeing that knowing the player’s approach is important to determining what ability to call for it a check is necessary, but suggested that expecting the player to be clear with their action declaration up front would be more efficient than asking probing questions every time. I don’t think this is really applicable to what I was discussing with Umbran. We were talking about a case where what the character is trying to do is clear, but the way in which they go about it might affect which ability ought to be applied to the check (assuming one is necessary) If you’re asking follow-up questions after every action declaration to figure out what ability to call for a check with, I imagine it would make a big difference in efficiency. If you’re not doing that (which I take it you are not), I don’t imagine it would make much difference in efficiency. But I imagine it would run into the phenomenon Umbran was pointing out, where you always end up calling for Ability (Skill) checks with the same combinations of ability and skill, even when a different ability might have been more appropriate to what the player was trying to do. [/QUOTE]

Verification